Some of the world's smartest technology companies may be a little bit too smart for their own good. Fueled by corporate leaders with big egos and a desire to develop and control new markets, companies like Apple, Google and Microsoft are increasingly treating their operations like a game of chess.
But is this really such a good thing? There's a strong argument to be made that companies engaging in the type of calculated strategy required to win a game of chess actually risk doing very foolish things.
The CrunchPad is dead. prominent tech blogger and CrunchPad creator
Michael Arrington revealed that the tablet PC designed specifically for
web browsing would not be coming to a store near you after more than a
year of work.
While many, myself included, were skeptical about the CrunchPad's
commercial viability, nobody predicted its downfall: a rift between
Arrington and his development partner "over nothing more than greed, jealousy
When Verizon went after wireless competitor AT&T with a "There's a Map for That" commercial showing AT&T's inferior nationwide 3G coverage in the United States, AT&T was caught off guard.
Its response: file a lawsuit. The justification: AT&T believed that the map was deceptive and that consumers would not understand that its map excluded areas where 2G coverage is available.
He may not have run a $50bn ponzi scheme but the domain name industry has found its Bernie Madoff. Yesterday, it was revealed that an employee of SnapNames, a popular domain name drop service and auctioneer, had been bidding on SnapNames domain name auctions, winning valuable domains, inflating auction prices and boosting revenue for the company in the process.
All told, the employee, who was an early member of the SnapNames team and a vice president at the company, is said to have participated in 5% of SnapNames' total auctions between 2005 and 2007 and that the value of his bidding accounted for 1% of SnapNames' revenue during that time.
According to Google CEO Eric Schmidt, Google willingly paid a $1bn premium to acquire YouTube back in 2006. And if Viacom has its way, he'll soon be paying another $1bn 'premium'.
In the search giant's legal battle with the media giant over copyright infringement, Viacom has fired a potentially devastating salvo: it claims it has evidence that YouTube employees were uploading copyrighted content without authorization.
Facebook claims that its recent problems with click fraud are behind it but one advertiser is sending Facebook a clear message: your problems are just beginning.
Sports website RootZoo has filed a lawsuit against Facebook in federal district court in San Jose, California and is seeking class action status. The company is being represented by Kabatek Brown Kellner, a law firm with a history of litigating click fraud actions.